tv U.S. Senate CSPAN January 18, 2013 9:00am-12:00pm EST
>> today attorney general eric holder speaks before the u.s. conference of mayors annual meeting. he's expected to discuss efforts to reduce gun violence and new gun laws proposed by president obama. live coverage starting at 11:30 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> tonight on c-span we will show you inaugural speeches from the last 60 years starting at 8 p.m. eastern with president ronald reagan's address from 1981. though clinton in 1993, president dwight eisenhower in 1957. harry truman, 1949. 1969, richard nixon. then-president john f. kennedy in 1961.
george h. w. bush in 1989. lyndon johnson from 1965. president jimmy carter in 1977. he will wrap up the night at 11 p.m. eastern president george w. bush, 2001. starting tonight at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> why did you write a book about your experience because it was an abortive period of history. i felt that the fdic's perspective should be brought to bear. have been some other accounts of the crisis i thought were not completely accurate. especially since what we did and what i did. so i thought it was important for historical record to present our perspective and also i think currently for people to understand that there were different policy choices, different policy options, disagreements. and that if we want to present this crisis, another crisis from happening again i've only felt that the public itself needed to be engaged more on financial reform, to educate themselves
better, make an issue with their elected officials. i have some policy recommendations at the end of the. i hope people will look at this recent. >> the former head of the fdic, sheila bair on the government's role during the country's worst financial crisis since the depression. her book is "bull by the horns." sunday night at eight on c-span's q&a. >> next comic kansas governor sam brownback delivers his third state of the state address. in his remarks before the joint session of the house and senate, he gave his plans for balancing the state budget which faces a projected shortfall of $267 million for the fiscal year beginning july 1. this event in topeka is 25 minutes.
>> good evening. mr. speaker, madam president, -- [applause] you jumped my laundry now going to have to repeat. you will have to do that again, i hope. i was just looking at her thinking there's a lot of new faces here. welcome. good to have you in the legislature. it's going to be a great you and they do have before i get started one quick big announcement. next year at this time the capital renovation will be complete.
[cheers and applause] finished. that's been about a decade in coming, but it does look beautiful. legislators, justices of the kansas supreme court, lieutenant governor jeff colyer and members of my cabinet, leaders of the native american nations of kansas that are located in the state, my wonderful wife and first lady of kansas, mary, my parents -- yes, please. up [inaudible] my parents bob and nancy brownback are joining us tonight up. [applause] and my fellow kansans, good evening.
kansas governors have appeared more than 130 times to discuss important business. i am honored to be the first governor to be able to say welcome, madam president. [applause] mr. speaker, madam president, the state of our state is strong and blessed and leading americ in a number of key areas. let me begin tonight by saying kansas is a truly special place, a state that chose freedom when the darkness of slavery divided our nation.
a place where the world learned to fly and bounce a basketball, and the place where a boy born in a log cabin 200 miles north of edmonton canada could become speaker of the kansas house. what an amazing place. [applause] that sounded cold to me. [laughter] yes, kansas is a special place, and it is our home. when our country seems adrift, kansas leads to the stars through difficulty.
in an era when many believe america has lost its way, kansans know the difficult path that the nation must take. it is the well-worn sod tracks of hard work, thrift, patience, perseverance, faith, sacrifice and family that will get us where we want our country to be. and as has been our tradition since before statehood, our place, kansas, will not be timid in doing what is right, even if much of the nation takes another way. where others choose to raise taxes, we will lower them so our people have more money, not the government. where other governments expand, we grow smaller. where others choose to grow spending, kansas grows jobs. in important ways, our state is going against the tide and
reflecting more of the values of the greatest generation, the world war ii generation, more than my own. where some accept the breakdown of the family as unavoidable, we push back, knowing that strong families and healthy marriages are the best guarantee for the future of our kids. where some walk away from our nation's motto, we embrace it as a part of the pioneering spirit, in god we trust. [applause] you yes, kansas is a special place. when i started as governor, we began the fiscal year with $876.05 in the bank and a projected deficit of $500 million, even after taxes had been increased.
i think a number of you remember that as well. working with the legislature, we ended last fiscal year with a $500 million ending balance, a billion dollar swing to the good and we paid off all of our callable bonds. good job, legislature. [applause] we are now in a strong fiscal position. the last decade was unfortunately a lost decade where kansas lost thousands of private sector jobs while the rest of america grew. in december 2010, our unemployment rate was 7%. today our state's unemployment rate is 5.4%, the 10th lowest in america, and wichita state university projects we will add more than 24,000 private sector jobs in the state this year alone.
that's good news. [applause] when i started as governor, we had the highest state income tax in the region, now we have the 2nd lowest and i want us to take it to zero. look out texas, here comes kansas. [applause] in the previous decade, we had population losses of more than ten% in nearly half of our counties. today we are adding hundreds of new kansans in many of our rural counties. communities like colby are actually adding kindergarten
classes for the first time i decades. kansas has been blessed. although the current drought is harsh, our reservoirs and aquifers continue to give us the water we need. but now they need attention. several of our reservoirs and many of our lakes need dredging from siltation. the ogallala aquifer needs local action to reduce its use and save some of it for future generations. our forefathers and mothers sacrificed to provide for us. now we must prepare and in cases, sacrifice so our children and grandchildren will be provided for. we will go forward by simply doing the right things for our kids. for one, we must reduce childhood poverty. trillions of dollars have been spent since president johnson declared war on poverty, yet the childhood poverty rate,
nationwide, has remained virtually unchanged at more than 23%. we need a new strategy. kansans intuitively know what the brookings institute has reported, that the best way to combat childhood poverty is with three things. effective education, jobs and family. a key to a child's success is the ability to read. this morning, 40,000 kansas children woke up, got dressed, and went to kindergarten. they are the class of 2025. they are the future of kansas. being able to read is one of the greatest gifts we can give these children. yet, 29% of kansas 4th graders can't read at a basic level. 29%. a goal of my administration is to ensure each of the 40,000 kindergartners is able to read
proficiently by the time they reach 4th grade. we can do this. [applause] we must do this. it's important for our kids. that is why i am proposing the kansas reads to succeed initiative. this proposal has three components. first, it will provide $12 million to support innovative programs to help struggling readers. second, it will provide incentives to elementary schools that most successfully increase 4th grading reading scores. third, it will require 3rd grade students to demonstrate an ability to read before being promoted to the 4th grade. [applause] passing children up the grade ladder when we know they can't
read is irresponsible, and cruel. we can and we must do better by our children. [applause] it's never easy being a mom or a dad. but it gets even harder if one or both parents are not able to get a decent job. our road map for kansas is focused on the economic growth of our state so employment can expand and families can prosper. last year the kansas legislature passed the largest tax cut i the history of the state. tonight we are here to take another step on our path to no state income tax. this will create jobs and opportunities in our state that the current generation has left for texas or florida to find. by making government more
efficient and growing our economy, we can keep the sales tax flat at its current level and cut income taxes on our lower income working families to 1.9% and drop the top rate to 3.5%. this glide path to zero will not cut funding for schools, higher education or essential safety net programs. and for those who come to kansas or stay in kansas because of lower taxes, let me tell you, opportunities abound. an all-time record of more than 15,000 new businesses formed in 2012, a sign of strong economic growth. we are, as you know, the air capital of the world. our aircraft industry is back on the ascent, and southwest airlines is soon to land in wichita. we are the nation's breadbasket
and its meat counter and are becoming its dairy section as well. our oil production is hitting a high not seen in more than a decade with billions of dollars of a new vertical and horizontal drilling. we are number one in new wind investment with nearly $3 billion of new investment last year alone and more to come. our rapidly growing animal health sector that stretches from k-state in manhattan to johnson county grabs a 30% of the world market. we provide engineering, architecture and other services to people everywhere. our new path, our new programs path is the path home for our children. part of our strategy will involve encouraging, not destroying families. we will help families economically, educationally, and socially. it will involve local efforts of intensive support, mentoring and pushing people to the job
market, not another government program. we look forward to continuing our partnership with the casey family foundation as we strive toward reaching these goals. now, on the budget. just as families must budget, the state of kansas must prioritize its budget as well. fiscal discipline has seemingly become a lost art in government. our schools only get 54 cents of every valuable education dollar into the classroom. this at a time when we put more state money into k-12 per capita than any surrounding state, and when total spending averages more than $12,600 per student per year. we seem to focus only on how much money is appropriated, not on whether it is effectively spent. this must change and is changing during this administration up
[applause] i am submitting to this legislature a full two-year budget recommendation, wit -- with substantial focuses on efficiency and effectiveness. 's two-year budget is balanced. it protects base state aid and increases total state funding for k-12 schools. it maintains stable funding for higher education. it also provides educating 50 additional medical doctors every year at a state-of-the-art medical training building at the university of kansas medical center. we want the highest quality health care for kansas that's possible.
u[applause] this two-year budget provides essential services for our most needy kansans. it funds a new crime lab and training facility for our state's law enforcement on the campus of washburn university. it fully funds our state's infrastructure investments through t-works. additionally and important, both my 2014 and 2015 budgets provide a 7.5% ending balance, without cutting core services. [applause] this stands in stark contrast t the $876 that was left in july 2010. make no mistake, i believe in fiscal discipline an and in healthy, adequate fiscal balances. trends matter, and for years
kansas has consistently progressed to larger government, higher taxes, and unfortunately though perhaps not surprisingly, more of our citizens leaving. we are changing these trends. my administration has worked to restructure and reform state government to be more efficient and more effective. but there is a lot more we can do. one of the clearest examples of duplication in state government is the fact that we have two highway departments, the kansas department of transportation and the kansas turnpike authority. it is time that we realize the efficiencies to be gained by replacing these two operations and putting them under the same umbrella. [applause] we don't need two highway departments in kansas. one is enough.
by bringing these two large organizations together under the direction of the secretary of transportation, we will serve the public better and more efficiently. and have more money to put into our roads. yes, trends matter, but principles matter even more. in the democratic system of checks and balances crafted by our founding fathers, the power to authorize spending public money was given exclusively to you, the legislative branch. this is a core principle. of our way of government's. [applause] -- governance.
now, as a former legislator i'm highly protective of that power of the purse year because i know when it is the primary power of the legislative body. it's not the power of the executive know the judiciary. for the last two years, you, the legislature, have proven that you can increase state support for education while pursuing pro-growth economic policy. balancing a wide range of public priorities is a strength of our representative system and how it operates. and so i ask you to make it clear in law that defining what is a suitable provision for public funding of education is a job for the people's elected representatives, and no one else uelse. [applause]
kansans expect and are entitled to a government that is not beholden to any special interest group. this is a principle. the guiding principle of our american democracy must be that every citizen stands equal before the law, be they governor or farmer, lawyer or teacher. unfortunately, our current system of selecting our appellate judges fails the democratic test. rather than giving an equal voice to all kansans in the selection of our judges, kansas is the only state that allows a special interest group to control the process of choosing who will be our appellate
judges. that is not as it should be. here, the people rule. [applause] now i didn't realize this but kansas use to elect our state supreme court. i would be supportive of returning to that system or going to the federal model of judicial selection. either passes the democracy test that the current system fails. guidance for legislators i mentioned at the outset that many of you are new to the legislature. that's a good thing. the framers of our constitution intended frequent rotation in public office, providing valuable new perspective. yet there's no teacher like experience and no danger greater than pride.
with that in mind, please permit some advice from one who was a freshman legislator just 18 short years ago. first, i would suggest you to value relationships. i treasure the relationships i am fortunate to have with other people. one of those relationships was with paul wellstone, the wonderful liberal senator from minnesota. in 1998, paul and i co-authored the legislation which started america's fight to end human trafficking, work we have a chance to build on in this kansas legislature. paul and his wife died in a plane crash in 2002. others took up his work in the senate, but the loss was the departure of paul, a beautiful soul. cherish the people and your relationships within. they are more important than policy or politics. second, learn everything you can from those who have come before
you. those people know more than you can imagine, and if you take the time to listen to them, you'll learn a lot. for me, my mentors have included our own kansas treasures, pat roberts and bob dole. i also learned a lot from senators pat moynihan, phil gramm, and ted kennedy. for you, it needn't be someone from your part of the state, or even from your party. in fact, you'll probably learn more if it's not. and of all those you could learn from, may i suggest paying particular attention to a teacher? will you join me in honoring a man who has spent more time in this capitol than any other legislator in the history of the state of kansas, beginning his 37th year in the kansas legislature, the senator from shawnee, anthony hensley. [applause]
and i will take my own own advice there as well. senator inslee often offers me advice in kansas history. there's another person you can learn a lot from who has worked in the state house even longer than senator inslee has. his name is don. don has operated the statehouse snack shop since 1976. there may be people here who were not born in that period of time. i'm not going to ask them to hold their hand up. but he greets each day as a gift from god, and he too is a gift of joy to this capital. don, would you please stand up and take a bow.
[cheers and applause] that might even give me a free candy bar last mac way the minute, i'm in this of b.c. challenge, i can't do that anymore. lastly, measure your time here not by the loud volume of the positions you take but by the service you give. learn the facts, stand up for what you think is right and fight hard. but remember, today's opponent is tomorrow's ally and nobody, not even coach snyder or coach
self, wins every game. listen, learn, and lead so that we may move forward together towards a more prosperous, more just, more decent kansas. kansas is the heart of america. let's make our place a shining example for the nation to follow. it is within our reach to see that our children can read. it is within our reach to strengthen marriages and families. it is within our reach to reduce taxes. it is within our reach to lead in job growth and energy independence. it is within our reach to balance our budget and meet the needs of our people. our place, kansas, will show the path, the difficult path, for america to go in these troubled times. like kansas newspaper publisher william allen white once said,
there is just one way to stop progress in america, and that is to hire some hungry earthquake to come along and gobble up kansas. we have been placed here for a reason and our season is short. our needs are great. let us build a better state and let's do it now. thank you, may god bless you and may god continue to bless the great state of kansas. have a great year. [applause] thank you, thank you.
>> coming up live on a companion network c-span, today attorney general eric holder will be speaking about reducing gun violence in remarks before the u.s. conference of mayors. he we joined by transportation security administration on pistol. that gets underway on 11:30 a.m. also this afternoon a discussion on immigration, trade and safety along the u.s.-mexico border. >> i, barack hussein obama, do solemnly swear -- [cheers and applause] spent this weekend the 57th presidential inauguration as president obama begins his second term, sunday the official swearing in ceremony at the white house live shortly before noon eastern. our coverage include your phone calls and begins with a look
back at the president's 2009 inaugural address at 10:30 a.m. each and. -- eastern. live all the coverage begins at 7 a.m. eastern time on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. joining the conversation by phone, on facebook and facebook.com/cspan, and on twitter, #inaug2013. >> high, barack hussein obama -- >> i, barack hussein obama, do solemnly swear -- >> that i will execute the office of president to united states fatally. >> i will execute -- >> faithfully the office of the president of the united states. >> when chief justice john roberts administered the oath to barack obama, on january 20,
2009, there was a major problem. roberts was supposed to say that i will faithfully execute the office of the president of the united states. so then, barack obama stops, paused, smiled, as if to say,qss come on, man, this is my big day, you've got to get this right, but, unfortunately, he didn't get it right. so the very next night in the white house they did it again. this time roberts use notes in which he hadn't used the first time, and they got it right. >> jim bendat walks the history of democracies big day monday at 8 a.m. and again 8 p.m. eastern at booktv. part of a three-day holiday weekend on c-span2's booktv.
>> advocates for immigration reform yesterday called on president obama and congress to make it his top party for 2013. speak at the national press club come u.s. chamber of commerce thomas donohue said defenses can be built among different groups, broad reform can be passed through the house. this is about an hour. >> good afternoon. my name is ali noorani, executive director of the national immigration forum and i want to thank everybody for joining us this afternoon for this press conference on the prospects and the growing momentum for immigration reform in the 113th congress. there are many important issues for the one in 13th congress to address. but there are few issues that have a past, a present and future of bipartisan support like immigration reform. today's event is another indicator of a new consensus on immigrants in america that
emerge. to forge this new consensus, conservative leaders who hold a bible, wear a badge or own a business have worked over the last two years and gathered in the mountain west, the midwest and southeast to have rational conversations on how to make our nation, or how to move our nation forward on immigration. now, these leaders from the faith, law enforcement this is committees across the country are activating this consensus. today we are joined by the highest echelons of america's business, law enforcement and faith leadership to call upon congress to work together to pass broad immigration reform that, number one, deals with aspiring citizens by creating a road to lawful status and eventually citizenship for them while respecting those that have been in line and awaiting that position for many years. number two, modernize our nation's immigration laws so that future immigrants, future
integration of workers and families is legal, fair and orderly. establishing worker programs that serve the needs of our workforce and our economy. and, finally, reform that recognizes the need for safety and security, on our border and in our communities. with democrats and republicans recognizing the moral, economic and political imperative to create a 21st century immigration process, the 113th congress marks the best opportunity for broad immigration reform in nearly a decade. but for legislation to pass it will take leadership. leadership from the administration, from congress and from faith, law enforcement and business leaders at all levels. in each case the leadership that is needed must be strategic, disciplined and unified. our speakers today are exactly that. strategic, disciplined and unified. our unity of purpose comes from the common crisis facing
families and businesses in our midst and cuts across professional sectors, geographic region, political stripes and religious police. our consensus lies in a common belief that all of americans prosper when we welcome immigrants and empower them to participate fully in our society. we have a broad, a range of speakers today from disc three constituencies and i want to start with tom donohue who is president and ceo of the u.s. chamber of commerce to the world's largest business business organization representing the interests of more than 3 million visits as of all sizes, sectors and regions and. and for years he has been an incredible ally, partner in champion in our push to face our nation's immigration system. >> thank you very much. good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. i'm honored to be here. i'm pleased to be joined today by my friends and partners in
the business, law enforcement and religious communities to talk about immigration reform. immigration reform isn't just a program to be implemented or a problem to be solved. it's an opportunity to be seized. it's an opportunity to fundamentally improve our global competition, attract and retain the world's best talent, and the hardest workers, secure our borders and keep safe america's legacy as an open and welcoming society. people are entitled to their own opinions on this issue. and as with all know, there are many of them. but they are not entitled to their own facts. and the facts are crystal clear. our current system is broken. everybody knows it. everybody recognizes it. it is not serving the interests of our economy or our
businesses, over our society. america cannot compete and win without the world's best talent. for example, it makes absolutely no sense to educate foreign students in our university, and then send them home to apply that knowledge and skills to their economy, not to ours. we cannot sustain vital programs for the elderly and needing more workers to grow our economy and to provide a larger tax base. commonsense immigration reform is an important way to address our changing demographics, as an aging society. look at me, you understand that. we can't harvest our food, care for our sick or sustain our military without immigrants and temporary workers. our current work, these laws
contain arbitrary caps that have absolutely no connection to what's happening in the real world. there are very serious limits in scope and difficulty in implementation in these current rules. shirley, we can do better. in fact, we have to do better if we're going to have the workers we need. what we need is this, a lawful, rational, and workable immigration system that secures our borders, provides the workers we need at all skill levels, and protects the rights of citizens, businesses, the undocumented, and those legally pursuing citizenship. we believe immigration reform should include the following in a related components. we must secure our borders and enable people in commerce to float efficiently and lawfully in and out of our country.
we have made significant progress on this front in recent years. we can build on it by smartly deploy our technology, personnel and programs along the border. i must say parenthetically, a lot of the people that come to this nation don't necessarily come through the border. 40, 50% of them just a longer than they intended to. we need to thoughtfully designed temporary worker programs that would allow employees to use immigrant labor when the u.s. workers are not available. more to say about that in the q&a. overly restricted visa policies are depriving america of both the high and low skilled workers that we need. we need a visa system type to market demand. and it must go beyond highest skilled, seasonal and agricultural workers.
and include other areas where employers face demonstrated labor shortages. home health care aides and nursing home workers are prime examples. the cap should go up when the economy is strong, and be adjusted down when the economy is not. as i mentioned, we need to expand the number of green cards to foreign nationals who graduate from our colleges and universities with advanced degrees. even with high unemployment we have millions of job openings that go unfilled. the the the workers come here to fill those jobs, or let me tell you, ladies and gentlemen, those jobs go somewhere else. and when they do, other jobs go with them. we also need a workable, reliable national employee verification program. now, they be verified brough rand has been dramatically improved. we are ready to beam -- to move
forward with it nationally, provided there is strong preemption language to stay a local laws, no obligation to read verifies the whole -- i know countries with 35, 50,000 employees who certainly don't have to do that. and we need safe harbor for good ethics by employers. finally, we need to provide a path out of the shadows for 11 million undocumented immigrants who live in the united states today. with the understanding that they will meet strict conditions and pay a civil penalty and taxes going forward, and some say back taxes. and that they will learn english. many of them already have. and many of them are already paying taxes but not getting any credit for it. we can run our economy without them. send those 11 million people home if you could ever find
them, and it would be ugly. and so i suggest we're not going to round them up and deport them, nor should we. we have this debate, so let's not forget one fundamental issue. and that is who we are or what this nation was built upon. the dreams and the hard work of those who came here seeking a better life. the bottom line on immigration is that the status quo on immigration in our country is a fundamental loser. i'm optimistic that this time we have an excellent shot at getting immigration reform done. it is essential to our economy, our country, and our way of life. now, we are very proud to be working with the partners on this stage, and we will work with others as well, and we will make passage of immigration reform legislation one of our top priorities this year.
so at this time i'd like to turn the podium over to doctor do, the vice president for public policy and research, and that the ethics and religious liberty commission for the southern baptist convention. thank you very much for your attention. >> good afternoon. glad to be here with you today. thanks for coming and being a part of this time together. we are just delighted to be here, standing with so many folks with the business community of folks representing law enforcement. and want to see if there is representative of a large slice of civil society, saying that we need to come together, find a way to solve our nation's immigration crisis. each of us with different perspectives on this has different reasons for why we believe we need to resolve this.
.. >> you don't have to read very far into your bible to see how god told his people to deal with the stranger in the midst of the nation that he himself established. the nation of israel was established by god. he set the boundaries and the parameters and the laws for that nation, and he gave it very clear directions for his people in that land on how to treat the nonisraelite. and you can just start reading,
and before you know it you come across a passage, for example, that says that you should love the stranger in your midst like yourself, you know? that's pretty strong language, to love the stranger in your midst like yourself. you're not going to do the kinds of things to yourself that some people propose that we do to the person who is here illegally. so when we go to our bible and we read that, we understand that god has an expectation for how a people with power would treat those who are vulnerable and weak in their presence. um, you know, i think god has a lot of reasons for that. one is, certainly, that we understand that these folks also are created in the image of god. they are as much image bearers of god as we are. they are as deserving of respect and dignity that comes with the
fact that they are bearers of the image of god as we are. and we should treat them with that level of respect and dignity as well. and you just can't be doing that with the situation that we have in this country today. and that brings me to part of the humanitarian side of this. you just -- it is not possible to respond to the plight of those who are here living in the shadows compassionately without actually speaking to their circumstances and trying to assist them. now, i don't know, i don't know how you could have a clear conscience thinking that we're going to in some kind of way consign 12 million people possibly to perpetual poverty and as a perpetual underclass in this country. we've never done that to a people. i can't imagine that we would do
it today, and i can't imagine that we could do that with a clear conscience. it is simply not the right thing to do, it is certainly not the humanitarian thing to do. it is, indeed, not the christian thing to do. so we're here in coalition with this broad group of folks because we believe this is a moral and humanitarian issue. we're already engaged on this as well. we're busy on the hill already visiting with congressmen and senators and their staff, and we're also busy out in the country helping southern baptists and other evangelicals understand the issues. we, um, just kicked off on monday the i was a stranger campaign. some of you were probably on that press call. that campaign calls on christians simply to spend 40 days reading one bible passage a day about immigration reform, something that the bible has to say about immigration reform and then reflecting on that and letting god speak to them about what would be the christian
response to the need of the undocumented here. we believe if you just go to your bible, if you open your heart before god, god will lead you to say we need a just immigration reform in this country that will actually make it possible for us to get these folks on a path toward legal status and on the path toward prosperity in this nation as well. so i hope that you'll go to that welcome back site. in fact -- to that web site. in fact, you can just go to the evangelicalimmigrationtable.org, find the information for i was a stranger, download the bookmark and join us in that bible reading and prayer campaign. i believe god will speak to you in the same way that he's spoken to us. immigration reform, just immigration reform, is a top priority issue for the southern baptist convention's ethics and religious liberty commission. we do not intend to let this
fail. we will stay on top of this until washington, d.c. and our country finally does what is right by the 12 million who are here looking to us to do something to help resolve their dilemma. thank you. >> thank you, barrett. our next speaker is attorney general greg zoeller from the state of indiana. greg was elected as indiana's 42nd attorney general in november of 2008 and just last week was sworn in to a second term as state attorney general and has been an incredible ally for the issue in the state. thank you for joining us, greg. >> well, thank you. and i welcome the opportunity to join with these voices and call upon our federal government to rise above partisanship and rise to the occasion. i only speak as the elected attorney general from indiana, but i can tell you that most of
my colleagues, the other attorneys general throughout our country, all share this sense of frustration that the federal government has failed in its responsibility in the area of immigration. we often complain that the federal government, let's say, overreaches into the role of the states, and i think it's borne of that frustration that a number of states including indiana has tried in it own way to try to address the issues that washington has failed to address. in indiana we've had a bill that was passed that i was required to defend even after giving my legislature my legal counsel. we followed it all the way to the supreme court when arizona case was taken up, filed an amicus brief. but i do know how to read a
supreme court opinion and recognize, like most of the attorneys general, that it is a federal responsibility. of but you've got to at least understand the frustration of our sister states that are trying to make up for the fact that washington has failed us. so this, this inability to act in washington is not something that states are able to do. so states have to act and likely are going to continue to try to act in the vacuum even while there are obvious constitutional questions. one of the things that i wanted to focus on was as attorney general i work within the criminal justice system and particularly want to voice some of the concerns of our law enforcement officials. i think the requirement that our law enforcement officials at the state level somehow be
depptizeed -- deputized to be i.c.e. officials is simply something they're not willing to do, not something that is really within their capacity to do and really takes their eye off the ball of maintaining the safety and security of the people of indiana. they also tell me that when they do have a stop and there's these concerns that are raised among undocumented, it can turn what would normally be a simple process of issuing a ticket into what could be a troubling situation with somebody who is in fear of being deported. you have people that have a family someplace nearby, so the risks that are attendant to this raising the profile of having states' involvement is something that the law enforcement community is very concerned about. finally, i would leave it that as we look at the issue of federalism and we look at what
the proper role of the states are and the proper role of the federal government, there's an awful lot of work being done by my colleagues to try to encourage washington to focus more on the role that they are given within our enumerated powers in the constitution and less on the areas that the states are quite capable of doing on their own. immigration is not one of those issues that states can do on their own. it's one of the reasons that we have a federal government. and this failure of the federal government has jeopardized the rule of law and the safety and security of the people of our states. so again, i'm proud to join in these voices. the states don't all agree on what the proper federal response should be, but i can tell you that they all share the same frustration that i have and the people of my state. so i'll be willing to continue
in this and continue to bring this issue to washington until, again, they rise above their partisanship and rise to the occasion. thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. attorney general. our next speaker is carlos gutierrez, vice chairman of citigroup and from 2005-2009 he was the 35th secretary of the u.s. department of commerce, former secretary gutierrez served under president bush and before his public service within the administration he was chairman and ceo of the kellogg company, a global company and marketer of a well known range of brands. mr. secretary, thank you for join us. >> thank you. good afternoon to all. you know, 2013 is probably the first time that we're going to take another shot at sensible
immigration reform since 2007. so there's a lesson here that if we don't get this right this time, we're probably going to have to wait another five years. so it is absolutely essential that this become a real issue of substance and not an issue of of political theater to see who can get, you know, the upper hand. um, since 2007 our economy has not been well served, so we know that there are r&d centers that have opened up in canada because people can't find the scientists and the mathematicians here in the u.s. we know there are family farms that are shut down, others that have moved to mexico because they can't find workers, and the whole economy is suffering because we can't grow without immigration. and, you know, we're sort of staring in the face of a potential great stimulus here without it costing a trillion dollars.
we've also seen the human complexity of immigration intensify. the kids who have been born here to undocumented parents, the kids who came here when they were 4 or 5 year old who know no other country but the u.s., parents who have worked in a job for 15 years and are hoping that, you know, that this is their future, that they can be a part of the american dream. and every single day it just becomes more complicated. and until lawmakers act, the president, the congress, we are just allowing this humanitarian situation to go on. and it just strikes me as so un-american that we ignore it. so, um, and again, ignoring the problem as we have seen doesn't make the problem go away. there has been consensus, i
believe, that two things are not going to happen, two courses of action. on one hand we are not going to round up 12 million people and kick them out of the country. um, and i can't name anyone who has said that, whose point of view is that we do that. and i'd be incredibly embarrassed as a u.s. citizen that that would be our country's response to this. um, and i don't think we all want that blemish on our history. so the way we deal with this becomes a permanent part of our history. we also know that the other extreme is we're not going to go out and, you know, give free passports to whoever wants one. so somewhere in the middle there is a solution. a lot of compromise, but it's going to take leadership. this is not going to happen with a tremendous amount of leadership from the president, from congress, but also as has been mentioned from business,
from law enforcement, from the faith-based community. one thing that is different this time for our side of the aisle, i say "ours" as mine, the republican side, we have a super pac called republicans or for immigration reform. and we're going to do something that hasn't been done before in the past. we're going to put money behind the problem and support candidates who support immigration reform, um, and give cover to people to come out and admit that they are for immigration reform. if we don't get this right, shame on us, because this is about the future of the country, this is about competitiveness, this is about who's going to be the global economic leader of the 21st century. if we get it right, then the 21st century is ours. and that's what's at stake in
this effort and in getting this reform through. >> this is the first time this has ever happened in a press conference, that our podium -- right? mr. secretary, thank you very much for joining us and thank you very much for those words. our final speaker is with the u.s. catholic conference of bishops. ambassador johnny young is director of refugee services for the u.s. catholic conference of catholic bishops. johnny is a former ambassador to five countries and currently oversees the u.s. bishops' outreach and service to refugees. he's an expert in foreign policy and migration trends worldwide. ambassador, thank you for joining us. >> thank you so much, ali. and thank you for the extra ambassadorship. i only had four. [laughter] >> you need another one.
>> i'd like to thank ali and the forum and, um, all of you for the invitation to be here today to say a few words, um, and to -- i'd also like to thank all of the other members of the panel here for their contributions. i'm here to represent the u.s. conference of catholic bishops. it's known sometimes by just usccb. the conference has been engaged in this issue of immigration reform for decades. we look forward to this debate and urge our elected officials not to lose this opportunity to reform a broken system. there are several areas the bishops will focus upon in this debate. first, there must be an automatic pass to citizen -- path to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented. we cannot and must not, excuse
me, fall short of citizenship for the undocumented where instead they receive legal status but no chance to become americans. we should not sanction a permanent underclass in this society without the full right that other americans possess. we have been down that road before and with disastrous consequences. should the party of lincoln embrace a path to citizenship so that all persons in our society can earn the right to pursue the american dream? i hope so. should the party of jefferson and our first african-american president agree to a bill that sanctions into law a permanent
underclass? i would hope not. while there will be temptation to compromise on this issue and provide the undocumented less than full rights, we must resist this temptation. and give them a chance to earn the right to become americans. it is the american way. second, the bishops will fight to preserve an enhanced family unity in, as a cornerstone of our national immigration system. this principle has served the nation well over the past 200 years as immigrant families have helped build our nation. we must not forsake the family in this debate; mothers, fathers and children.
preserving family reunification in and promoting economic growth through our immigration system are complementary and not competing goals. finally, we will fight to preserve the right of both u.s. and foreign-born workers in this debate. we would like to join with our labor and business allies in fashioning a future flow worker program that features the appropriate workplace and wage protections so that the rights of all workers and the needs of the business community are served. congress and the administration must seize this moment and reform our broken system. families are being divided, and migrants continue to die in the american desert. this suffering must end.
we look forward to working with our elected officials and all of goodwill towards this end. thank you. >> thank you, ambassador. so as you can see by this range of perspectives that the differences are not great, but the unity is very clear; that congress, that the 113th congress must take advantage of the opportunity that lies ahead to pass broad immigration reform. so with that, i would like to take questions from the press. and, please, as you ask your question, please introduce yourself, your name as well as your outlet. and, again, we'll only take questions from the working place. >> bill gibson from the south florida sun sentinel. i'd like to hear a little more about the republican super pac. will jeb bush and people from some of the high impact states like florida be a part of that?
>> i think at this point we have -- [laughter] we're getting all the paperwork together, and we should be ready to go very, very soon. obviously, the role of the super pac is to raise money so that we in turn can use that to support immigration in districts where a republican is supportive. we can't, as you know, we can't give the money to a candidate, nor can we say vote for this man or this woman. but we can support the concept in those critical districts. you'll have to ask governor bush what his plans are and what he's doing. i would assume that anything that is related to immigration will catch his interest. but we expect to do this in the right way, in a big way and to have an impact, um, because up
til now it's been a lot of, you know, working the hill, but we're going to have to, to put more muscle behind i. >> great, thank you. >> [inaudible] >> introduce yourself, sorry. >> oh, i'm sorry. i'm -- [inaudible] you have representatives talking about a comprehensive package, and you have representatives talking about several bills related to immigration. so what do you say is the right path to work on this? >> you know, the answer to that, i think, can be found on the hill. because at the end of the day, they have to make it work. in 2007 we tried a comprehensive approach. and while it's not a flawed approach, the, what you have to watch out for is that you hold back easy things until you get the very complicated things worked out.
and that's part of the problem of a comprehensive approach. on a, the -- senator rubio has come out with a -- the interesting thing with that is that you break up a 750-page bill into manageable pieces, and it also becomes more transparent to the public. um, you know, we had a 750-page bill, a comprehensive approach, and it was dismissed by one word, amnesty. and that's the trap of these large, comprehensive, very complex bills. having said that, i think it's a tactical issue, and i hope it's resolved as soon as possible, because there's so many other bigger problems that have to be addressed. um, but i think they can both work with the leadership and the will to get it done. >> excuse me. let me just make a comment about
that. i don't think this is a problem. there is a great advantage to a comprehensive bill. we can fix it and get it done. there is a disadvantage to a piecemeal bill if you pass, for example, issues for highly educated people to get visas, then you lose -- and they are all taken care of, then you lose a certain amount of support for the other issues. i don't think we should decide that now. i think senator rubio's doing a great service by raising these issues and addressing it. i think our colleagues here at this meeting, i met this morning with mr. trumka who runs the afl-cio. he and i actually talk a lot. i believe we ought to just move forward on all of the arrangements so that the hill and, will develop an understanding about all these issues and fen finally -- and then finally decide whether they'll do it in one, two or
three pieces. and that is the least of our worries. the fact is that they do it. and for us, we'll continue to talk about a comprehensive bill. >> okay. barrett? >> um, first of all, i'm delighted that senator rubio is helping folks on the republican side of the aisle take the issue of immigration reform as seriously as he's taking it. so he is providing leadership on that, and we're appreciative of that. i think it's great to see movement on both sides of the aisle on this. whether or not it's a comprehensive bill or whether it's done in individual pieces, i think, is to be determined by leadership in the house and the senate in consul talkings with the president -- consultation with the president. i don't know exactly how they get that done, but right now at least they're both working in the right direction. >> next question. >> cameron joseph from the hill. going back to what you were talking about meeting with richard trumka, i know one of the big sticking points was guest worker program and what
you do in the 2007 debate. i'm wonder what type of progress you two have made and whether there's any comity between business and labor on this and going back to what ambassador young was saying, i just want to know your thoughts in terms of a definite path to citizenship versus, you know, sort of permanent status in the u.s. >> well, first of all, mr. trumka and i this morning were pleased to report to each other that our staffs are working very well together on these issues. you're right, that's one of the issues that has to be resolved, but we're both committed to getting a bill, and i think if we can come to a resolution on those subjects, you might see things move a little more quickly. the question of citizenship is one that has a great passionate kind of response from some people. let's take this in a sequential way. first of all, we have to take
these 11, 12, how many million people they are out of the shadows. we have to give them a legitimate existence in this country. a way that they can pay taxes, a way that they can drive cars, a way that they can live as human beings in this country. and if you want to talk from there to a path to citizenship, i think we can build a consensus around that by the steps that would be required. i think it would be terrible to say that we're going to have, make them legal, and they would never have an opportunity for citizenship. i think that would say something about this that we wouldn't like. the only, the ambassador and i can probably debate the strategy on how to get from here to there, but there's no question that what's needed immediately is legalization and a path to get to where we'd eventually
like to be. >> okay, thank you. >> hi -- [inaudible] of the world journal. would the secretary -- [inaudible] the difference between now and 2007 when you were talking to senators kennedy and mccain, and are you more hopeful this time? thanks. >> you know, i believe that -- and i say this somewhat anecdotally, but there have been more people coming out in favor. there is, there are people who have moderated their stance on this from six years ago, and i think part of that is just an understanding that no action is very bad for the country. um, i also would like to say because i believe you have an asian background, you know, we're -- the question about future flow is excellent. we, this is not just about hispanic immigration, or this is not just about undocumented
hispanic immigration. this is about immigration from the world. asians are making a great contribution in this country. africans are making a great contribution in this country. latin americans are making a great contribution. so as we think about the future flow -- because this was of an issue in 2007, and it was, it just goes to show there's not just one party that has a problem with these things. without the future flow, we are in trouble. without a strategic future flow, we will, we'll have another undocumented problem in five years. and unless people want to recognize that reality and take the vote and do what's right for the country, we're just going to continue spinning our wheels. so i think a lot has changed. you know, we talked about, ali talked about business, badges and bibles. i think all three of those groups could have done more in
2007. >> be um, do you agree with mr. donahue's future flow concept having, well, between different caps for visas and according to the economy and -- >> yeah, there has to be a way of, you know -- a lot of our laws passed in the 1950s. some in the 1960s and some of, you know -- so there has to be a way of bringing it up-to-date. and those are things that will happen to be, you know, negotiated. i would just say that it can't all be managed by a centralized system in washington where washington decides how many nurses we need, and washington decide cans how many, you know, farm workers we need.
so business will have to play a role, and business will have to be the determining factor in order to make this work, you know, in a practical way. >> just think for a minute that 10,000 people a day retire in the united states, seven days a week, 365 days a year. we are a nation with unemployment and with a great shortage of people to go to work in specific jobs. and the secretary's point is right on target. if you try and do this with a master overseer of exactly how many left-handed nurses and right-handed carpenters get into the united states, we're doing the wrong thing. we need to do it on demand and on need. and if we have an extraordinary need to be competitive and, by the way, many because of the
price of energy and the fact that the country now is probably will have and has the access to more energy than anyone else, you're going to see manufacturing jobs coming back to the united states. l and i, i think right now there's a couple of million people that we could hire if they had the skills, if they had the education, if they had some of the other requirements to fitting into a high-tech, high-performance economy. and it's very hard to explain. how can you have that kind of unemployment and have that my need? -- have that high need? well, you also -- the story in "the new york times" the other day had a lot of other parts to it about, you know, they're drilling for a lot of oil in north dakota, and we don't have a lot of people that want to move there. it's a real complicated issue. >> right here in front. >> american city business journals. you all have mentioned senator rubio's leadership in this, what
about in the house? are there any house republicans that are champions for this, and what sort of feedback or indications do you get from house leadership that they're willing to take this up either on a step-by-step basis or a comprehensive bill? [inaudible] >> well, that's true just about every issue that comes, comes to the congress. doesn't happen in the senate, it's not going to happen. doesn't happen in the house, it's not going to happen. we've seen a lot of leadership in the house in the last session. of we believe that -- we believe that there's a growing number of people that would like to resolve this issue. this is a matter of, you know, the snowball going down the hill. you start with a small ball, and you start rolling it, it gets bigger and bigger. i'm not worried about whether we can get the votes in the house if we can get an agreement between labor and management and the faith-of based people -- faith-based people and other groups that have the business.
and if we can get that together, we'll get the votes. when you have 14 different opinions and everybody's disagreeing with everybody, it's harder to get the votes. >> barrett, do you want to -- >> sure. we're going to be visiting with republican members and staff beginning, ethan, next week. and we've already had visits. we will continue to do that on the house side. we've already spoken with a number of folks in the house to talk with them about immigration reform. and there is, there is definitely a very good development on the republican side in the house at this point. i'm not sure they're as far along as senator rubio is in the senate, but i do think they're all thinking along very similar lines, and i think that as they continue to talk with each other and they continue to talk between the house and the senate
that we're going to get to that place. i think that the determination is there at this point and that as has been said if the folks sitting up here continue to press this case, i think we will get to a point where everyone is agreeing on what the big pieces are and then we'll be able to work from there to something everybody can agree on. >> okay. david right here. >> somebody else. >> [inaudible] >> i just wanted to share with you some of the things that we're doing at the conference. um, one of the things that we will be doing shortly is we will have a gathering of, an annual gathering of something called the catholic social ministry gathering. and that will bring to washington about seven or eight hundred catholics from all over the united states. while they're here they will have door knocks, and immigration reform is one of the
key program features of this year's gathering of the catholic social ministry. the second thing is we have something called the justice or for immigrants campaign, and we have already begun a postcard campaign to senators and congressmen, you know, asking for their support and asking them to take charge on this issue. so a lot of activity already. >> dave knack murrah with the washington -- [inaudible] president obama, of course, promised in his first term to take a leadership role on immigration reform and disappointed many supporters in the fact that he didn't get comprehensive reform moving. he's pledged again to do so. in his first press conference in november, he talked about he wanted to see a bill early on this next term. now he's introduced yesterday legislative ideas for gun control. he's got another debate over fiscal policy coming. what does leadership mean from the president in your minds? what do you think do you want to
hear in the state of the union, and how much effort needs to come from the white house? or is there a better idea that something would emerge from the senate, and the president would take more of a supportive role in some way? >> it's a very good question, and i think part of the problem is we don't -- the answer here is not to hear another great speech about immigration reform, okay? we need some action. but my sense is that this is what happens when immigration reform is important, but it's not the number one issue. so, you know, you can keep on sort of delaying it because you've got to take care of the fiscal cliff which now look like it's going to be a fiscal stairway that goes all the way to the end of the term. i don't think this is going to be over soon. it's going to be, you know, an ongoing negotiation. guns? i think that has, that has surpassed immigration reform on priorities, and i'm not making a judgment here, i'm just trying to state some facts. so you're right, this has to
become the number one priority for the president and for congress, get people together and say we're going to fix this problem because it's important enough to be fixed. and that hasn't happened yet. and i think it has to be a lot more than just, you know, a couple of very nice sentences in the state of the union address. >> others? >> i would only add that i think it's incumbent upon us as citizens, as members of groups, as advocates, as nongovernmental organizations to keep the pressure on the president so that he remains focused on this issue. there will always be different issues that will come up. no one can predict what his calendar's going to be for the next x number of months or so. but to keep that pressure on him, to keep, to keep him focused on this issue. >> and i would only add what i said, reiterate what i said at the beginning. we believe that immigration
reform is different in that it has a past, a present and a future of deep bipartisan support. and while, yes, congress does have many other important issues to grapple with as well as the administration, just this range of speakers today and what we've seen over the last two years shows that conservatives, moderates and liberals across the country want this president and this congress to act. and that's different from any other issue. >> me again. so democrats are talking on the hill about a direct path to citizenship. but senator rubio is talking about a transitional visa and then access to the legal system that we have now. it's a very different path. what, what would you support? what is the right path? >> we -- from the standpoint of republicans for immigration reform, we support immigration reform. we support something that can get passed. we support, you know, so we're not going to second guess people
as long as as they're making progress. in 2006 and-'7, one of the guidelines we had was that we didn't want the undocumented -- [inaudible] to cut in front of the line of people who had been waiting to do it in a proper way. so the result or the solution was a legalization process. they are legal. now, not everyone wants to be a u.s. citizen. some may want to go back home and may not want to go through the process. but be they do want -- but if they do want citizenship and a green card, then there's a process for that. the important thing is that they're legal, and they can come out of the shadows, as tom said. that was the approach then, and we'll e see how the two parties,
you know, come to an agreement on what the approach should be. >> let's take two last questions here. one right here and one in the back. >> [inaudible] >> i'm sorry. >> you know, it's very natural thing for the press and the media to look for the differences. i mean, that's how you write a story. if you have everybody agreeing, you probably won't write the story. certainly not in an aggressive way. in this issue doesn't bother me or worry me one bit. if we get to the point where we have a program, a program to deal with immigration in this country in a fundamental way, we'll resolve that question. and if you want to know what the resolution is going to be, in my opinion, it's going to be a progressive issue. we do this now, we set a series of steps in place to do this as we go forward. and i think everybody here has said that. it needs to be a process to
citizenship, a process is something that takes time, but it's set in place, and we follow it. and that's where we're probably going to go. look, if those are the issues we have to resolve, we're in great shape. we'll get a bill. you know, if i might suggest since, chairman, the lady in the back who's got a camera who will put you on tv has been trying to ask a question all afternoon. [laughter] so fair deal? >> oh, boy. >> thank you very much. um, and i was willing to ask if you could come to the microphone, because my cameraman would love that for editing purposes. it would be a lot easier. and, secretary -- [laughter] i will get to you later in spanish, so don't go away. [laughter] >> [inaudible] >> she's going to do it in spanish, you stay and do it. i can't do it. [laughter] >> you said that for the claimer, immigration reform is going to be a priority, and i wonder if you could expand a
little bit more on that. exactly what is the chamber going to do, what steps besides going onto the hill and lobbying? be what else as an organization can you do? and the second thing is that this could be for anybody on the panel. we know there's a lot of discussion going on right now as to what is going to be in the bill. i think there's a broad consensus about what needs to be in, but there's discussion as to who's going to present the bill. should it be the white house? should it be the white house and the senate democrats? or should we wait for a, um, bipartisan bill? what would you prefer to see presented, and what do you think would set a more, a clearer or more supportive message? >> okay, let me answer the second question first. in my opinion, the discussion, the engagement, the exchange, these kinds of meetings should carry on for a little while because we're building a sense of consensus between people who in the past had more disagreement than they had agreement. i think that will move ahead
fairly quickly. and i think as the secretary indicated there are a lot of other things going on right now in a new administration. we still have to get people into critical jobs, we still have to finish the reforce of the house and the senate which happens every change. so i think, i think i would prefer or not to have a whole lot of one-off bills right now. i'd wait a few weeks or months until we come to a much closer consensus, and i think we'd have a better chance of passing something through both houses. i don't much care where it starts. i'd like to all three groups have an understanding of what's going to be, and let 'em all go in a back room. we don't have to be there, they can figure out what the sequence is going to be. on the fact of what the chamber is going to do is we'll do it here in washington, and we'll do it around the country. we have thousands of state and local chambers around the world -- around the country.
we have 900 associations, business organizations from different industries that have representatives all around the country. we have millions and millions of people on our grassroots network. that's what they thought about that. and we will, we will put that all to work when the time is right. right now we're building consensus when there are bills to be advanced, we'll do that. the worst thing to do in this town is talk when nobody's listening. so we need to build a consensus, get people ready to listen can and then go out and advocate it in a very strong way. thank you. >> pictures this morning from the west front of the u.s. capitol as the district prepares for this weekend's inaugural ceremonies. president obama will be sworn in in a public ceremony this coming monday.
and just a quick heads up from d.c. public transportation officials, they say that access to and around the capitol by car will be tight this weekend and on inauguration day. so the best way to get around will be the city's metro system. >> i, barack hussein obama, do solemnly swear -- >> this weekend the 57th prcial inauguration. sunday, the official swearing-in ceremony at the white house live shortly before noon eastern. our coverage begins with a lookback at the president's 2009 inaugural address at 10:30 a.m. eastern. and then monday the public inaugural ceremonies with the swearing-in at noon eastern at the u.s. capitol and other inaugural festivities including
the capitol luncheon and the afternoon parade. coverage begins at 7 a.m. eastern time on c-span, c-span radio and c-span.org x. throughout the day join the conversation by phone, facebook and on twitter, hash tag inaug2013. >> and live on c-span today attorney general eric holder will be speaking about reducing gun violence in remarks before the u.s. conference of mayors. he'll be joined by transportation security administrator john pistol, that'll start at 11:30 eastern on c-span. and also live this afternoon a discussion on immigration, trade and safety along the u.s./mexico border. speakers include homeland security's assistant secretary of international affairs as well as the mayors of phoenix, las crew saws, new mexico, and laredo, texas, and that'll begin at 4:30 eastern, again, live on c-span. >> yesterday the head of the
international monetary funneled, christine lagarde, talked about the state of the global economy and emerging markets. she also outlined her organization's 2013 plans for renewed economic growth. this week the imf approved an additional $4 billion package for greece. this is about 45 minutes. >> well, good morning to all of you. happy new year. welcome back and thank you very much for being here in 2013. a few comments maybe to begin with on, you know, i'll take for 2013 given that there are few comments from various corners about what is it's going to be like. and i was trying to think of a formula to actually encapsulate how we perceive 2013. and my sense is that, you know, we stopped the collapse, we should avoid the relapse x it's not time to relax.
okay? it's a nice buzz word for me, but i think it does encapsulate what we're trying to say. clearly, the collapse has been avoided in many corners of the world thanks to policies that were decided quite often by central bankers, often eventually by government authorities particularly in the advanced economies whether you look at the eurozone or whether you look at the united states of america, although often at the last hour the right decisions have been made. and as a result, the collapse has been avoided. our sense is that there is still a lot of work to be done, and i'll come to that in a second, which is why we should avoid the relapse and make sure that none of the decision makers and none of the authorities actually relaxes. because there is a bit of recovery in sight and because
the markets in particular have clearly anticipated good news, it's time to just slow down, slow the pace and go back to business as usual. so what does it mean in terms of policy? and i will mention three key areas. first of all, it's important to follow through on policies to put uncertainty to rest. for those of you who followed carefully the works that the team do, we are trying to really associate uncertainty and confidence. and while this is not clearly definite yet in terms of investment, it's yet much more certain in terms of consumption, removing uncertainty played a key role in rejuvenating confidence. so putting away uncertainty by following through on policies is
important from our perspective. what does that mean? key common challenges amongst the advanced economies will be about restoring fiscal sustainability. i'm sure you will have questions about this issue, and i'll be happy to take them. and in terms of fiscal sustainability, we are particularly concerned about the medium-term plans. they're clearly short-term imperatives that have to be adjusted on a country-by-country basis at the right pace with the right chemistry about it, but we're particularly concerned about the medium term in order to bring public debt down at a pace that is attuned to each and every specificity of the country. that's a common feature or for all economists, particularly the advanced economies. force the euro area -- as far as the euro area is concerned, we
think that a lot has been achieved in terms of policies, in terms of new tools in the tool box that the europeans have available to fight crisis, yet firewalls have not yet proven operational. progress needs to be made on banking union, and clearly continued if not further monetary easing will be appropriate in order to sustain demand. for the united states, we think that all sides should pull together in the national interest avoiding further avoidable policy mistakes that is failing to agree on increasing the debt ceiling on time and prior to that preferably and reaching agreement on medium-term debt reduction.
that i mentioned earlier. for the nonadvanced economies, and i'm putting together the emerging markets as well as the low income countries, clearly those countries are faring at a much better pace in terms of growth. but everywhere i've traveled in the last two months in africa, in latin america and in asia there's always been a concern about the unbalances and the lack of decisive action to address the advanced economies' crisis. so this spillover effect including in terms of confidence building are clear. and given those, this increasing interconnectedness -- particularly with certain markets -- reducing this uncertainty is going to be key to the health of the global economy and to a lot of those regions that are still very dynamic to continue to grow at a pace that is sustainable and
necessary for the well being of their population. this is excessively too general because when you go down the list of the emerging market economies and the low income country, some of them are much more vulnerable and often to the risk of contagion or, rather, spillover effects of the advanced economies. others are more interconnected regionally and less prone to those risks. but overall in the main, there is that clear risk which heeds us to recommend -- which leads us to recommend to them that they actually improve and increase the buffers that they have already used and which they need to replenish. that's the first imperative that i just mentioned which is to follow through on the policies in order to eliminate the uncertainty. the second point which is, in our view, critical because it has been at the heart of the latest development of the crisis is to finish the reform of the
financial sector. we recognize that there has been progress, but the process has been very time consuming and continues to contribute to uncertainty. we sense sign of waning commitment. there is still momentum, but it's probably not as crucial as it was, and we regret it. you can see that when you examine, actually, the content of reforms where some of them are slightly diluted, softened at the margin, where implementation is delayed, that's clearly the case with basil iii, for instance. where the inconsistencies of approaches that lay the ground for possible arbitration, and we believe that it's important for the regulators, for the supervisors, for the authorities to actually resist aggressive
industry pushback. what risks do we see in that regard? well, further weakening of capital and liquidity standards. there has been, as you know, discussions on the liquidity coverage ratio which has concluded as it did, and it could have been better. we do not see enough progress on the cross-border resolution scheme which is, which has been recommended, as you know, by the fsb which has not yet resulted in actual deliverable at region and country level. and we certainly see delay in the regulation concerning both shadow banking and derivatives. the result goal of that financial regulation massive work that needs to be completed, that needs to be done on an
accelerated rather than a slowed-down basis clearly has to do with the growth of the real economy. and that's my third key point. that, clearly, authorities, policy decision makers have to focus on the real economy. and what do i mean by that? i mean, clearly, a focus on growth and not any growth, but a growth that can actually deliver jobs. crisis has been in the making for many years now, and what we are seeing is improvements on certain fronts but deterioration and certainly no improvement on the employment front which we recognize as critical both from an economic point of view, but also from a social point of view. there are more than 200 billion -- 200 million people out of a job, and two in five of those unemployed peel people are under -- unemployed people are under 24 with clear
concentration in certain areas and certain or countries including in the advanced economies. so we need growth for jobs and jobs for growth. a vicious circle in which we encourage policymakers to try to engage. we need inclusive growth and one that shares appropriately the benefit amongst all layers of the population. that applies across the world both in advanced economies as well as in emerging market and low income countries. what do we mean by that, for instance? well, i've been traveling to quite a few low income countries lately including countries where we have partnership by way of technical assistance or by way of programs. what it mean, for instance, transforming the energy subsidies programs into cash
transfers, into social safety nets that are proper orally targeted to the people that -- properly targeted to the people that actually need the support and are not across z the board and generally benefiting anybody including those who don't need it at all. finally, we need balanced growth. we need to see continued the shift in demand from the advanced economies to the new growth engines in the emerging market economies. that's one aspect of the balancing that is needed, a rebalancing. we also mean by more balanced growth a growth that is actually compatible with the sustainability of our environment and the fight against climate change. now, what does that mean for us? i remind you that in 2013 the imf is certainly stronger, better equipped financially, has certainly refined some of its
analytical tools. we will continue to strengthen our surveyance, peps on spillover -- especially on spillover effects and on the financial sector. we will continue to strengthen our support for the entire spectrum of members through lending, capacity building, training, technical assistance. in other words, we are not only serving the needs of a selected group of countries, but we serve the entire membership. and when you look at the map of the world and see where our teams are whether it's in capacity building, in technical assistance, in programs associated or not with financing, we are all over the map. and we will continue to push ahead with the important and yet not completed reform of quota and governance which, as you know, includes three stages, two of which are completed, the third one not yet. and certainly, short of a few
members -- one of which is, obviously, a key member. that's really what i wanted to open our conference with, and i would now, you know, welcome your questions and address each and every one of them to the extent that i have the answer. i'm sure i will find in this extraordinary institution the right talent that will have the right answer for you. so i will not pretended that i know it all. i learn a lot in the process. >> thank you, managing director. let's begin down front. yes, sir. right here. >> thank you, gerry, and thank you, madam managing director, for this opportunity and for this press conference, for talking with us. you will be meeting -- my name is andre -- [inaudible] russian news agency. you will be meeting the russian prime minister in a few days in davos, and i wonder how you view the russian agenda for the g20
in the context of your aims that you've just described for us. and if you could maybe change anything in that agenda, what would that be? thank you. >> well, i would not change the venue, because i'm very much looking forward to going to both moscow and st. petersburg later in the year. i'm pleased about the timing, because st. petersburg will be a little bit warm orer, i hope. now, the focus of the russian agenda for the g20 is right, because it is focused. to have as priorities the ways and means to restore and maintain growth and create jobs, number one. number two, the continuation and completion of the financial sector reform and, number three, using the mutual assessment
process to actually guide countries and economies to cooperate, i think those are three very important agenda items. there might be more, but those three are the ones that we are really concerned about and where the imf can actually help and provide advice and support, and we will be very happy to support the russian presidency on these three agenda items. >> okay, thank you. lady right here. in the center. yes. >> thank you for this opportunity. i'm -- [inaudible] i wonder, madam lagarde, your assessment on the development of the present economy. we saw a very frustrating growth and that there is no greater expectation that --
[inaudible] and we haval the inflation raising and a very concerned situation on our fiscal sector. despite of this, brazil is actually one country where we don't have, we don't have a very good economic growth, but where we still have job creation. and so it is one of this very, you know, unusual situations. i wonder your assessment on that, please. >> in a way i share your concern about the brazilian economy. it has grown, and certainly less than was initially expected.
but having said that, the real question is to really understand whether it is growing at capacity or whether there's an upward gap that, you know, could be filled in by appropriate macroeconomic policy measures. >> okay. >> i will leave it like that. >> thank you, managing director. gentleman with his hand up here. yes, sir. yes, you. >> thank you. howard schneider with "the washington post." on the, elaborating on the financial reform a little bit, i was wondering, you seem to be attributing some of the recent events to a pushback from industry, and i wonder whether or not you feel it's also possible that the process has just reached the limits of what it can do at this point and whether necessarily we're going to be left with a somewhat incomplete response because of the concerns about growth and credit provision?
>> well, you know, two points on that. yes, i'm always concerned about the pushback of the banking industry, because i think it's the nature of the game, and it's the constant approach by the industry to actually pushback because it's nicer to operate without regulation rather than with regulations, with less supervision rather than with too much supervision. i might be a little bit blunt on that, but that's my experience as former administrator of finance and having, you know, observed the profession close by. equally, i don't think that the appetite for growth, the need for jobs and the necessary level of investments is not consistent with having the financial regulations in place with the right level of certainty with
appropriate supervision. because, essentially, what the financial regulation reform aims at is to make sure that there is security, that there is protection, that there is credit available for investors to actually develop the activity, invest in the economy and as a result create jobs. so i don't see that as being sort of mutually exclusive. i think the concern we all have about growth, jobs and investment is supported by the need to have a financial sector that is vibrant, that is focused on the right priorities, that is appropriately supervised and that is certainly regulated. and when i mean certainly regulated, it's regulated with certainty. >> thank you. i notice the lady way over here on the right. yes, ma'am. >> thank you. my name is -- [inaudible] from the portuguese public television.
i would like to know what do you expect for portugal this year and, also, what do you suggest to the portuguese authorities to do in the short term to go back to markets? thank you. >> well, thank you very much. i would observe that portugal has done an extremely good job at reducing the fiscal deficit. that's point number one. i think two-thirds of the way has already been completed and done. we've just approved yesterday the review and disbursed close to a billion dollars which was the next tranche of the portuguese program. there is still work to do. so my, you know, we stopped the collapse, let's avoid the relapse and not relax applies to portugal as well. and we know that more fiscal contraction and consolidation is needed going forward. we've made a range of proposals.
they are just proposals for the moment, clearly. the portuguese authorities have to decide what is most appropriate for the, in the context of portugal. and if they have, you know, other options that are best accomplished in order to both accomplish the fiscal consolidation and preserve the chemistry of portuguese society, that is perfectly legitimate and fine. but, you know, there is a bit more time to go, a bit more work to do, but they're clearly seeing the end of the program and, certainly, we hope, you know, growth and jobs at the end of the day which is really what matters because, you know, with 16% unemployment rate and over 30% with the young people, i think that's really the key priority. >> okay. gentleman right here in the front. yes, sir. >> [inaudible] >> can you wait for the mic? thank you. >> i'm jeremy dodgeman with ap.
according to the -- [inaudible] imf himself in part of austerity and growth may have been underestimated in europe. i wanted to me if -- i wanted to know if you share that opinion. >> well, i always share the opinion of my chief economists. i will challenge him eventually, but at the end of the day when it's over and it's agreed, i do not challenge the issues and the findings because they've been solidly worked out. you know, clearly research was done, and research is constantly done. so the imf does not operate on the basis of principles that are set in stone and forever. i think the pride of this institution is to constantly question, challenge, revisit, re-examine, test the findings and the assumptions in order to be as up-to-date as possible.
and the numbers that have been used some five, six year ago were numbers that had been examined, reviewed, explored and that were common to pretty much all the profession, all the professionals in the field. and you're talking clearly about fiscal multipliers here. now, clearly the crisis that we've gone through is unparallel, has no historical precedent and has reshuffled the assumptions and the cards on the map of fiscal multipliers' assumptions. which is, in all honesty, a work that was put back under review and for which the teams here have concluded that the fiscal multipliers were higher in the context of that unbelievable international crisis. with shortage of liquidity, with lower demands addressed to the economy and, you know, what we have seen developing. so that's the reason why the
research d. and the -- the research department and the entire institution decided to come out, publish, explain what our new findings were that were clearly informed and transformed by the context of the international crisis that we've gone through. >> so gentleman in the second row. >> thank you. brady with "the wall street journal." the fund has now gone into a new program with greece that seems to have stretched the parameters of what the fund had sought from greece and from the european partners in terms of debt reduction. how long do you think this can go on without getting true debt reduction for a country like greece? and do you think there's some specific time period where you need to see that before people will lose faith in greece yet again? >> i'm pleased that you see that
people have regained faith in greece and that confidence has been restored and that this time it's different, if i may say. we have yesterday approved two reviews and a disbursement of two tranches under the existing program. so it's not really a new program. it is the eff that had been approved in march. but clearly, revisited in the sense that we had asked and the troika partners have eventually agreed that an additional two years were needed for greece to accomplish the fiscal contraction that is still needed because it is, we thought it would be and we think that it would be better for the country to actually have a bit more time. equally, um, you know, the clear variation from the march set of
principles applying to the programs which has changed is the renewed financing support and general support on the part of the european partners. and the commitment that they have made to not only extend the maturity of of their loans, not only significantly reduce the interest rate, but also provide whatever is necessary going forward, in particular in terms of additional support to alleviate the burden of the debt on greece. ..
>> it's very important, of course, and it changes the face of the greek land scape, if you will. >> i want to go to the lady right here, yep. >> hi, ashley sutton. russia's central bank said that the world's leading economy's on the brink of a currency war to keep up with japan and japan's use of the devaluation to do competitiveness. germany's finance minister said he was also concerned about the impact on global liquidity of japanese monetary policy. what's your thoughts on the possibility of a currency war and on japan's monetary policies that seam to be aimed after weakening the yen? >> well, first of all, i don't like any war, be it currency or
otherwise, and when they used the expression, he was the first one. minister finance of brazil, i strongly objected to that idea. at the time i was minister of finance, not managing director of the imf. i think determined to argue against currency wars, competitive devaluations which are just against the principle of the imf, and that actually caused the creation of the institution so we're not supported in any shape or form of any such attempt to create competent devaluation and open currency wars. i think if only the risk of retaliation should prevent anybody to go into that sort of monetary policy, and multiple ways to improve competitiveness other than to use currencies as a tool so i think that really summarizes the position of the institution. >> let me come back down to the
front here. yes, sir. >> [inaudible] many times to speak about the responsibilities of the great government, the implementation of the greek program. i want you to ask if you can tell us -- if there are any mistakes happenedded over the last two years on behalf of the imf on the greek program that you wouldn't like to be rated again in 2013 or in the future for greece. >> you know, given where we are in partnership with the operatives of greece, i'm not personally, especially interested in trying to rewrite history or blame anybody or point the finger, okay? my keen interest and my very strong hope is that we can continue to work together, and that the greek people will support the greek authorities in order to deliver the end of the
program to ensure that the country can come back to growth, to ensure the people sacrificed enormously in terms of pension can reup the benefits of their sacrifices because three things will happen. number one, the structural reforms will be conducted that are necessary to actually collect on the sacrifices that have been made. second, that, you know, the fiscal consolidation program that has been decided continues at the right pace with the additional two years that we have suggested and that have been accepted, and, third, extremely important that there is appropriate efforts to overall the tax administration of greece to collect tax revenue and to fight tax evasion. i forgot to mention the privatization program which is also necessary, but which is also, you know, delivery not for greece. >> thank you.
gentlemen just here in the third row. right here. no -- thank you. >> thank you. what -- >> identify yourself. >> [inaudible] what is your insight on the chinese economy in terms of opportunities and the changes, and secondly, what goals are on top of your agenda that you want to achieve in the new year? thank you. >> yes, global growth is not just on the top of my agenda, but it's on the top of the agenda of anybody who cares about the economy and who cares about jobs and who cares about, you know, rebalancing and consolidating. it's clearly very conducive factor underlying element for all of what we want -- jobs,
fiscal consolidation, rebalancing. it makes it a lot easier when you have growth. turning to china, i would certainly, number one, observe that there is continued significant and substantial growth expected out of china. i would observe there's been a rebalancing within the china economy with a clearer focus on consumption rather than exports which is reflected in the significant change in the current scope of china, and i would finally observe that while, you know, moderately over valued, the currency of china has adjusted significantly, and my hope is that that trend that we have observed will continue into 2013 and the new chinese leadership. >> thank you. i believe there's a question on the middle east here. thank you.
>> how do you see the impact of what's happening in the arab countries, this arab spring on the economies in the arab world, and do you have any particular concerns about it? >> it was published this morning in a particular financial newspaper about that, and the imf is very strongly engaged to support and help the arab countries that went through, significant changes in the last couple of years now. we have programs in place with the authorities in yemen, in in morocco, in jordan, and we are in advanced negotiations with egypt, and we will be starting
negotiations with tunisia. that gives you an idea of the scope of our involvement. we believe that an economy set of reforms and focus on growth must be applied to the those economies that have gone through political transformations, and there has to be an economic response to the social and people restoration. that's what we are trying to help. those economies have gone through the stress of the months of transformation, and they now have to resettle and reapproach the economy development in a more inclusive way and with a view to creating jobs. now, we would have to take each and every country to go under the skin of its economy and the particularities of it, but as far as we're concerned, we want to help, we want to partner, we
want to also give the signal to other donors, to other contributors that the governments in place are serious about restoring the economic situation, and we very much hope this would be the case. >> thank you. the gentleman to your left has been per sis tempt, thank you. >> good morning. i would like to ask -- >> with whom? >> ap, associated press. >> oh, okay. >> i want to ask you about argentina. i would like to know when the board will disclose argentina, the meeting will take place? whether recent high level context with argentina have provided movement to a solution, and, of course, what's your main recommendation in your december report? thank you. >> well, my december report was to the board and not to you. you will bear with me if i don't disclose the contents of the report. what i can share with you,
though, is that the board meeting is currently scheduled for february the first. i can also tell you that we have had a mission on the ground with a view to putting in place a financial sector assessment program, and that was a scoping mission. you know, it's the preliminary mission when we discuss with the authorities what aspect of the financial sector we will review, and they should be a second visit in march that is separate from the issue of accuracy of data. >> good. swing back around here. let's take the lady in -- yes, ma'am. yes, that's you, yes , ma'am. >> thank you. jennifer lee with hong kong phoenix tv. my question is regarding the debt and deficit issues of the
united states. do you think how the united states can do spending cuts properly, but minimize effect on economic growth at the same time? thank you. >> you know, the obvious response to that is timing. spending cuts are necessary, it's obvious. they should be anchored in the medium term. they should be sufficiently solid as to remove the uncertainty around them, and they should clearly touch on entitlements among other things. >> perhaps we can take maybe two more questions. let's go to the front here. >> front row. >> front, thank you. >> hello, i'm mike from greece, but i have a question not on greece, but --
[inaudible] >> traveling south. >> yeah. they don't want the imf to participate in the program. can you tell us why two months after the statement that you issued in november, we have no deal yet between cypress? thank you. >> you know, we -- the imf has been engaged, and we have, indeed, sent the mission on the ground, and we have had a dialogue with the cypress authorities. the building blocks of a program have been put together. it is not concluded because there's clearly financing issues that need to be resolved in order for a program to be accepted, and for the debt to be sustainable.
>> hi, if i can track you back to the arab world for a moment and ask you about the palestinian authority, do you have a plan at the collapse of the palestinian authority? do you have a plan in the wake of the developments there? >> well, as far as the west bank and gaza are concerned, you know, they are not members -- it is not a member of the imf, and we do not do lending for nonmembers. having said that, we do a lot of capacity building, a lot of technical assistance, and that's our other way of helping. as far as algeria's concerned, we do not have any particular program, plans, technical assistance in training at the moment with that country which i was planning to visit in march. >> okay.
last question, gentleman way at the back. >> thank you. happy new year. >> to you too. >> thank you. i'm wondering if you have any concern that in europe the political system has been pushed to an extent where more structural forms that will bring about the jobs and growth necessary won't be able to come about? >> so are you questioning the structural reforms that could not come about? >> because of the political pensions that have been pushed to it and whether it's too much of a challenge to push the reforms necessary, and with your approval, if i may, japan, is
their defense of the yen and their desire to continue to depreciate it? >> you know, on the attempt to reinvigorate growth and create jobs, there's two sets to argument. number one, there's permits to be satisfied at the national level, and looking at italy, spain, germany, netherlands, france, some of the central and eastern european countries, the requirements will be different. and what we see in many of the countries is attempts to implement reforms, decide reforms, own reforms, certainly not reached with partners in
france, and that's a good step in the right direction. for instance, when you look at the reform of the competition authorities in italy, that's a step in the right direction. when you look at the labor reform, that's it step in the right direction. there's a layer of national steps taken and in the making to improve these situations, the flexibility, the responsiveness to economic factors. then you have another layer which is the regional one, probably the one you are eluding to where, clearly, there are reforms as far as the banking union is concerned, and, you know, they'd never comment leaks, neither would i comment leaks by concerning other parties, and i would certainly be impatient to see what the
plan will be and what it will deliver, but i observe a lot of progress on that front. there's more to be done, but i don't think that we can get anymore accused the europeans of kicking the can down the road because they are producing results and exploring significant reforms which should help them recover, but the gain for them, the same principle applies that stop the collapse, they should avoid the relapse and not relax in general. now, on japan, well, clearly, that, you know, sort of recently anowrnsed fiscal and -- announced fiscal and monetary package is intended to create growth in the short term. we don't think that it's not associated with a midterm solid anchoring that could actually
indicate the determination to change the projectory, reduce the deficit, particularly appropriate because we see any such measure of being part of the overall package, and there is one that is missing. monetary policy with a different inflation target is in and of itself certainly a good and interesting project if associated with clear independence of the central bank. >> thank you very much, managing director, and thanks to all of you for coming today. we look forward to working with you in the year ahead. thank you. >> and, again, happy new year to you all. [inaudible conversations]
>> a view of the u.s. capitol earlier today as preparations continue more monday's ceremony. every u.s. president has taken the oath from the west front of the u.s. capitol. we'll continue to bring you shots from around the capitol today as preparations continue for this weekend'sic -- weekend's inaugural festivities. [cheers and applause] this weekend, the 57th presidential inauguration as president obama begins his second term. sunday, the official swearing in ceremony at the white house live shortly before noon eastern. coverage includes phone calls and 5 look back at the president's 2009 inaugural address at 10:30 a.m. eastern, and then monday, the public inaugural ceremonies with the
swearing in at noon eastern at the u.s. capitol and other inaugust rail festivities including the capitol luncheon and afternoon parade. live all day coverage begins at 7 a.m. eastern time on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. join the conversation by phone, facebook, at facebook.com/cspan, and on twitter.
this is about an hour and 15 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> all right, good morning, everybody. welcome to the 13th annual conference on science, policy, and the environment, disasters in the environment. i'm the executive director of a national council of the science of the environment, and it is my distinct master of ceremonies for much of the conference.
thank you for coming. lots of people are still outside, encourage them to come in and settle themselves down. super storm sandy, drought on agriculture, wildfires, the earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear reactor accident in japan last year, haiti earthquake, the list is long and worrying. in 20 # 11, we had more disasters in the united states costing more than a billion dollars than ever. in fact, we had more expensive disasters, but not quite as many in 2012. the drought and the super storm were hugely, hugely expensive.
disasters are happening with greater frequency, greater severity, and absolutely with many, many greater costs. we ray -- we are here over the next three days to work across traditional boundaries to connect scientists of all stripes with practitioners, with policymakers from the international to the local level with conservation organizations, with cooperations, and it is our belief that only, and i want to emphasize "only" by working together can we solve these challenges that face us. the costs are the just not financial, but as we tragically know, many, many lives are lost in these disasters so if we can come up with just one useful
idea in the next three days, the benefit -- even if it's only one life saved, it's worth it. i want you to recognize the importance of why we are here. a number of housekeeping items. first of all, there are around many people with these green stripes at the bottom of the name tags, these are the staff. these are the amazing people that work with me who i am honored for my colleagues, and they will help you with any problem that you have. there's always a problem that comes up we could not have conceived or thought of before.
we'll help you with whatever comes up, okay? inside the conference program is a map. this is our 11th conference here at the reagan building, and i still get lost. okay? many of you have been to in conference before. some of you have not. you know exactly what i mean. it's a wonderful building. it is absolutely amazing, but there are these wonderful sort of diagonals and twists and turns. there are times when i think it should be the international trade amaze as opposed to the reagan building. to fund things, you were given this raffle ticket. two tickets to the environment and clean energy inaugural ball that will be taking place on monday evening after the inauguration. to win, you need to put your
name here and phone number would be very helpful. we will do the drawing tomorrow evening before the john h. chaffey memorial lecture, and so if you want to win, put your name and hand that in at the registration area. silence cell phones. i was actually doing an interview this morning, cameras rolling, second question asked, halfway through my question, my own cell phone began to ring in my pocket so don't be embarrassed the way i was embarrassed the way i was this morning. turn off your cell phones. on your seats are question cards. the way we do questions here is you write them down so be brief and lemingble. if you write like me, your question will not get asked
because people will not be able to read what you've written down, okay? be better than me, write legibly and brief. if you have a question, do this, staff will come. they will collect the questions. we will root them to the moderator, and we have fantastic moderators. anybody who has been to the conference before, you know how we bring in journalists and reporters, people who are absolutely fan tas -- fantastic, and we try to not have powerpoints. there are a few places where you'll see some slides. we try to make this very dynamic, interactive conference, and so use the note cards. we also have on this orange sheet, just for the day, fill out the questionnaire, take off whatever you think. the things in which we can improve, we really appreciate hearing them. fill out the questionnaires. leave them at the front. okay.
there are probably housekeeping matters that i have forgot p, but that's okay. i want, now, to turn to our opening keynotes, and we are extremely lucky. we are going to open with an international speer -- perspective and domestic perspective. we have both speakers who bring considerable experience at all levels, and sometimes you get great speakers who are new to the subject. this is not the case here. these two individuals understand the issues involved as well as anybody in the world. we're really lucky to have them. they are both going to give remarks. the first is going to be margarita and then craig fugate,
and after they have both given their remarks, i will gather up your questions, and i'll come up to the podium and ask them some of your questions. we will begin with margarita, the united nations assistant secretary for disaster risk reduction. she has 30 years experience in the field, humanitarian relief, institution building. she has dealt with more disasters of more types, not just environmental, but broadly humanitarian disasters and more than probably anybody else. she has great perspective so if you will come to the podium and when she is finished, i will briefly introduce mr. fugate, and then we'll have his remarks and take questions. thank you. [applause]
>> good morning. i must say that i'm really honored and very impressed to have been asked to come and speak to this audience. i know you are a powerful group of scientists. i think a lot of students here today as well, and so we have both the advantage of the crude wisdom and hope for the future here today. the one idea that petermented to come up with after three days work is let it be three ideas for the future. i'm very honored, of course, to speak here today with craig fugate who i think is extraordinary practitioner and you will be very impressed by him and he'll talk to you today. i wanted to start with just a quote that i am a little bit engineering for the benefit of this audience.
this conference -- this is a cross road in human progress. in one direction lie the meager results of an extraordinary opportunity given, and the other direction, they can change the course of events by reduce the suffering from disasters. action is urgently needed. sounds good. yeah? this was a document 20 years ago. let me say that i'm really very pleased that you have made disasters the topic of this year's conference. i know that the national council for science and environment meet every year in this setting and that you pick teams, and i think the opportunity for us to bring together the practical disaster impacts with the science and the insights is very opportune.
i would also like to use the team of your corns, science, and resilience for the short commerce this morning. science has looked at disasters as a scientific issue. well before the international strategy of the disaster reduction was established, scientists worked for a minimum to get the tension to the level of risk and accumulation how disasters impact societies because it's societies that create disasters. disasters are not in themselves, anything but a disturbance of nature. after some of you will be familiar and maybe have worked at the international dk for disaster reduction which ended in the 90s, but i think that
very distinguished group, the united states was very, very active in this regard. that group of scientists felt a area where they felt no one was listening. they were something about distracted, bringing to the attention of the decision makers that we were in front of a very dangerous trend of undermining the significant development impacts that countries were achieving all around the world so when the -- there were a lot of geoscientists, of course, but also a very strong understanding that climate change was not only happening, but had been happening for a long time, and that was going to be a clear determinant for future disaster risk evolution. when the organization that i represent is relatively modest, really in the secretary, but what is not modest by what says
the markets they call international partnership that was built around the international strategy for disaster reduction. rich, i can simply say has one foots in the u.n. and one foot in the rest of the world because we cannot only work in partnerships, but we can only build on the knowledge of science. we have to work with governments, of course, local governments, with business, with parliamentarians, any stake holder that understands and is willing to engage in education and managing the risk for the future. the first project, the first idea of the people who got together in the earliest parts of the dk in 2000 is we need an instrument for international cooperation. peter mentioned cooperation as key here, and they started working on what became the frame
work, and i hope that at least 10% of you have heard about it. maybe. i'm used to that not being familiar, but used to people knowing what's in it when you start describing it. the frame work for action was the continuation of the preaches case. there was the strategy which was strongly scienced based so there was other tragedies, and the new strategy was about outreach and mobilization. it was setting a frame work for one outcome, three global and strategic goals and five priorities, and the sense of the people who put this together is actually a tack of the five things. you will be a safer nation and a safer world. the adoption of the frame work for action happened to go inside.
it was a coincidence, tragic one with the tsunami that took place in december, as you remember, 2004. in 2005, people met in japan to adopt the frame work, and i can assure you, even though i was not there, i was in indonesia at that time, but i can assure you that the frame work for action gainedded a completely different political imptous by the tsunami which was, of course, in all that tragedy, a strength that we have lived on a lot because it really forced the mind of many countries around the world. having worked on the frame work for action now, also set up a reporting system. the countries biannual reporting on the frame work. these are unique things. you have 140 countries voluntarily making reports into a system that's quite
establishing fairly discreetly, i would say, a kind of baseline for global disaster risks and above all what countries are doing about it. we just timize -- finalized the third cycle now. i think, you know, a little bit i'd say that the very strong emphasis on science have disappeared a bit during this, and what i would like to see is that we revitalize the science input, in particular, in economic and social science. i think so the physical sciences are there, although, i don't know what the case is in the united states, but i know for sure everywhere else in the world where i ask this question, are you teaching risk at academic level? are you engineering students learning about risk? the answer is all too often no,
so just as a message to you, i'm trying to mobilize academic networks to make sure there that the curriculum gets more and more informed by risk. business schools are teaching risk, financial risk, of course, but is our universityies around the world really looking into a future where they can equip their future leaders of countries and decision makers at every level to consider risk? not yet. whether they come today with the help of sciences, of course, we need to reengage and we have to revitalize strong interest in risk that we have have seen, and that the frame work for action, as i call it, the first generation, when i look back now at the work that's been done and evolution of risk and disaster losses. we're been in the period of preparedness as you call it.
it's been a period of building systems, of reaching out, of bringing up the evidence based of learning more in particular about the economics of managing risk big question of how we pay for disasters in the future. it's a critical period now. we're going to hear from our administrator fugate about this, but everyone around the world, there's a clear message from government that we cannot cope with these costs anymore, and the other message you'll hear many governments say is we have to ask for citizens to take much bigger responsibility for their own safety. now, you can call that a risk transfer mechanism, but it's a very important shift in the aptitude where governments see it as their role to take really care of the fallen. how this is going to take place
is quite the novel message, but how it's going to play out, i think, will be a very important point how we manage future risk. i think just to conclude on the risk evolution is a fundamental recognition that there's a gap that if the world should continue to maintain the idea of a sustained and equitable and social development that also will be inclusive, it is absolutely critical that risk is recognized and managed in all sector of society and done on clear recognition, but in the absence of this, there's increasing losses, will be social instibility, and there will be radical changes in society, and add to the risk of this disasters that you recognize, there's silent
disasters, and one of the most critical, i'm convince the by now is the longer term impact on individuals of disaster. not enough is known about the five, ten, 15, and 20 years after the disasters. education, health, income, many people 15 years talk about the worst thing they remember after the disaster is the unemployment and the economic losses, and they were not able to ever get back to where they were in the disaster, and this is in rich countries, not in poor countries where you have a very strong -- this per special circumstancetive is where, i think, we will find the model for resilience. we have to look at it really as an all of society obligation. it has to, of course, be a much higher political priority to look at all the aspects of resilience and safety. you are very familiar with the drivers of disaster risk. the frame work for action was
very clear. climate change, technological risk, poverty, weak governments, silent and various slow moving, but dramatic disasters, suffering a lot here in the united states like drought and future and current water shortages. very often urbanization is talked about as a risk. i cannot just say risk in urbanization because that's economic growth, modernization, opportunity, it's education, and it's also as many climate specialists say it's the most economically efficient way to manage climate risk because there's so many people in one place, it might be feasible financial affordable from a different perspective, but in themselves, all of these factors, of course drive risk very rapidly. internationally, if you just take a quick look at disaster
trends, you will, if you follow disasters, you will see that frequencyies, type of disasters happen more and more everywhere. people ask themselves what's the reason for this? when you work in disasters, you tend to less ponder the reasons, and you have to address it, but you also have to say if in is a persistent trend, which it has been for 40 years now, and what is it that we do in societies that actually do not make us more capable to an -- anticipate and mitt -- mitigate the frequency of disaster. what six or seven years ago, i met a group of them, met and economic what does this mean? you can't say with certainty. you heard that, but for sure it
means more of the same, more extremes, and more unusual events. i think that's not a bad planning pair dime. it could be very expensive if you have to build in redundancies in it, but as a model for you not be complacent, don't assume that every event is a final event, and really take seriously that it's not the events that create the disaster, but it's the society that it impacts that's the basis for disaster. it's how we organize society, how we design and build infrastructure, where we put our industries, and there's a lot ever about governance and authority that goes into managed risk and society as we will see. the knowledge base that we worked with is getting stronger. different kinds of global risk models are developed.
strong model, hard to project future losses and understanding various risk mitigation instruments meaning there were a lot. i hope you note an issued report in 2012 on, treem events. that's the language for disasters, and they did, and there's a good solid peer reviewed scientific study together with disaster experts from all around the world to see if we put these things together, what are the trends can be validated what was said, and the answer was largely not yet except for in a few cases where they say we don't have enough data to project anything for the future. thoag that we've seen after that has really shown any indication that we are not can wanting in the same direction.
the economic losses go up from disaster everywhere in the world, poor countries, rich countries, middle income countries. it's an increasing trend, and, of course, the rich are the countries that value the losses, but the relative impact on gdp is smaller. the poor countries are still in the position where, particularly, if they are dependenting on only one or two areas of economic basis, and they can suffer 12% of the gdp spike in the hurricane in the caribbean, and, increasingly they are in the situation that they barely rebuild infrastructure before the next hurricane comes and hilts the same infrastructure. many countries, in fact, today -- i'm not saying they are happy with the ability to prepare and respond to disaster, but compared to where we were 20
years ago, for sure, the capability to respond is much improved globally. what they see ahead of them is the fear of how are we going to pay for this reconstruction? over and over and over again. we don't have the financial means to do this, and where will the future strurmts development? how will the government also, and how can business cope with losses? i think these are the questions that will have to bring us together internationally and nationally to really look at what's the viability of the model for development we have, and who -- how do we keep innovating? what's the rate of innovation in financial strewments? i don't think it's very quickly right now. we are so much taken off by responding and worrying about today's events.
in the -- the second factor is population growth, economic losses going up, but you can see the population is growing two or three times, and, of course, river basin, and why is that -- it's obvious because that's the basis of the strong economic growth. this combination of economic growth driving accumulation of future risk is very clear everywhere, anded evidence is strong. now, all this means that we actually could know how to map for the future. we could give priority to looking at these area. finally, looking at future resilience, i'd like to share with you a couple of things that we have learned through the reporting of countries into the frame work for action monitor as
it's called, three reporting cycles. what are they saying are the successes? well, one success is building preparedness and response, early warning systems, improvements. a lot of legislation issued around the world. the big challenge is to get into these arena of development planning, agriculture, water, the land management, urban planning, this is what the frame work is for reducing underlined risk. it's the whole paradigm where i think we are still in the prearedness phase of getting the guidance and the strong direction, this is the high priority because the damage to society, and therefore we have to ensure that all parts of society, be it private or public, in fact, considers and manages risk. that's one aspect that comes to your report. they also report, in fact, that
they have varied challenges with information flow. not that they don't have access to information, but the way the information exists in the public space, it's such an enormous volume, and it's not really accessible for us as a decision maker to use rationally. how can we, in fact, help people who want to use all the knowledge that is out there to have easier access to be able to manage their risks in a rational manner? third point, lots of issues around governments. why is that? well, it's different in different countries, obviously, but, still, all too often the responsibility to drive, manage, and lead or risk reduction and mitigation is less with the national institution that are in charge of emergency management. if you are an emergency manager, you are -- unless you are
extremely well resourced, you are extremely base sigh, and in many countries in the world, you do not have -- to be frank with you, you don't have the influence in the government institutions to coordinate and lead and drive innovation. it's not easy to be in that position, nor do you necessarily have strong political access to be able to draw down and put it behind the necessary decision. the advantage is they know what the issues are. in practice, they can be a strong driving force for these, but most countries in the world comment on governments, and public policy issues and similar areas. the frame work for action, we are now in 2013 in 2015, it's
the end of the first working period, so to say. as of last year, we've been requested to facilitate discussions on the post-2015 frame work, and so this has already started in all the regions in the world. of course, here in the united states, with our partners, we also are trying to look into the future. what will risk look like in 25 years, and what are the critical areas that we dpsh if we work together internationally can be helpful to countries in regional organizations and motivating a shift on how risk is managed. there are two things that they say clearly so far. one is tackling the climate change and risk risk evolution duction. risk reduction traditionally and what has so far been called climate adaptation, 70% the same thank you do in the time frame
makeshift so why do we have separate policies and practices? why don't we make more rational use of the resources of the exe tent fixes? they say prees come to grips with this in the next frame work for action. second thing, and i believe this is a major, what people call emerging risk is really to understand the more complex and as a vulnerable we come, and the more exposed our infrastructure, and many of the fears that the fukushima accident after the earthquake, tsunami in japan, are, of course, not only limited to nuclear power plants. there's also chemical industries. it's living side by side with all the technology advance, and what impact the combination of a major earthquake, major
hurricanes have, and infrastructure that we're not sure about how resistance it is to these things, and, in fact, i think we are increasingly clear these are one of the major risks economically, socially, and politically how we manage future disaster risk. with that, i wish you a very successful conference, and i look forward to hear what other three things you want to do after the conference. thank you very much. [applause] thank>> thank you. i'm gathering a lot of questions up here so keep them coming. it was interesting in listening to your remarks, how many sessions we have this afternoon in this symposium and workshops tomorrow that will be making up on those themes. there's plenty of opportunities to drill down a lot deeper, and
introducing craig fugate is a challenge. the thing about the federal emergency management agency is something that people don't hear about except when only that's the only thing they hear about them. you don't hear about it, but when a disaster strikes, they are prompt and center in the news. the public perception of fema has had a roller coaster ride. it was time after katrina when it was subject to a lot of criticism. the last four years, fema's standing in appreciation has risen dramatically. it has gained a level of respect that i think is absolutely essentially reflecting the fact that there's leadership that's really given a lot of
preparation when disaster strikes, fema is ready, not just itself, but in its relationships at different levels of government, and that is due in very large part to the leadership that craig fugate has brought to fema. his background is interesting. he began as a volunteer firefighter and emergency paramedic. now, if any of you have had an opportunity to interact with volunteer firefighters and paramedics, you know these are some of the very best people in our society. i happen to know several, and they are phenomenal people, and to see somebody like that rise to the position that craig has, i think, is a testament to mother toke sigh in the society, and that is a great thing. he was director of florida's
emergency management agency for many years. in 2004, he dealt with four hurricanes, four major hurricanes in one year. that is a test for anybody at any time. for the last four years, head of the management, and he's done a phenomenal job. craig, if you come dot stage, i'll hand the podium over. [applause] >> thank you, coming from the south, we often time -- comedians make fun of southerners, and they make fun of things we call signs, it's a sign if -- so let me give you one that it might be a sign if the private sector will not insure you. ever thought about that?
we oftentimes get so loss in talking about policy and cause and the debates over climate change, is it real, not real, manmade, not manmade. i work pretty much in the world of outcomes and not in theory. it happens, you deal with it. i asked myself if the private sector with all of their financial resources and tools cannot figure out how to make money off your risk, it might be a sign. they can do it for house fires, can't they? they can do it for your car as bad as a driver is in dc, they can insure you, and you can afford it; right? you might not like it, but you can afford it. they figured out how to make that work. how come they can't do earthquakes? how come they can't do floods? how come they are not doing a lot of other hazards? that might be a sign. i think this really gets down to
something that we oftentimes when we talk about disasters and the response, everybody always is, you know, we got to, you know, make everything back the way it was or better. i like this. we always hyphenate it, we want it better. yeah, you built it good enough, well now insure it. i think the challenge we have is when we talk about hazards, we're talking about risk. we're talking about investment strategies in who bears that risk. my sense is that if you're the united states, most people don't realize this so i'll tell you what just happened a couple weeks ago. the national flood inurns program actually has more policies than we have cash on hand. when sandy hit, the amount that